Talk:Organism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article has been identified by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team as a Core Topic, one of the 150 most important articles for any encyclopedia to have. Please help improve this article as we push to 1.0. If you'd like help with this article, you may nominate it for the core topics collaboration. |
| B | Organism has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
{{V0.5|class=B|category=Natsci}hihihihihihih}
This page should probably be merged with life, or at least some of the content transferred. Also, some of the references appear only marginally relevant.
- seconded.
. More should be imho. PomPom
removed below because a similar link already goes to that site
- NCBI Taxonomy resources (rich)
remove all comments associated with the link as they are not very relevant here. See Tree of Life. The comments have been moved in that discussion page
- The Tree of Life. Its basic goals are:
- to provide a uniform and linked framework in which to publish electronically information about the evolutionary history and characteristics of all groups of organisms
- to present a modern scientific view of the evolutionary tree that units all organisms on Earth
- to aid education about and appreciation of biological diversity
- to provide (eventually) a life-wide database and searching system about characteristics of organisms
- to provide a means to find taxon-specific information on the Internet, both taxonomic and otherwise
Moved to discussion page of Tree of Life
- Green Plant Phylogeny, Research Coordination Group, "DEEP GREEN", Understanding the Diversity of Plants. A five-year effort to reconstruct the evolutionary relationships among all green plants has resulted in the most complete "tree of life" of any group of living things on the planet, including animals.
Removed for non obvious relevance
- BBC News, August 4, 1999: The mother of all plants. Scientists have discovered that every plant species alive on land today shares a single common ancestor, at least 450 million years old.
- 7 August, 2000, Fantastic fungus find Citat: "...Researchers in the US have found what is probably the largest living organism on Earth....Scientists say it covers 890 hectares (2,200 acres) of land - an area equivalent to about 1,220 football pitches. The fungus is called Armillaria ostoyae, but is more popularly known as the honey mushroom. This particular specimen is calculated to be about 2,400 years old, although it could be two to three times this age...."
- BBCNews, 4 December, 2002, Life 'began on the ocean floor'
Contents |
[edit] Structure
I'm attempting to develop this article and integral to this development is the structure. What do people think of the following?
-Semantics
--Viruses
-Organisation
-Features
--Life span
--Conscious intelligence
---Memes
-Chemistry
-Structure
-Evolution
-Ecology and interaction
Feedback would be appreciated. --Oldak Quill
19:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that there should be some discussion about the definition of life etc. but I really do not like all of this philosphical discussion about unusual concepts of organism. I think that the current article suffers from lack of clarity due to too much detail about these side issues. The important story of the article is to discuss the features that the different types of animals, plants, fungi, bacteria, archaea and virues etc. have in common that makes them organisms. The article should bring all of these things together and be a start point for linking out to the other entries for the differnt groups.
Something like:
-Definition
-Features
-Organisation
-Biochemistry
-Evolution
-Ecology and interaction
Other issues --Life span
--Conscious intelligence
---Memes
--Azaroonus 20:05, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- This is the problem: there isn't a fixed defintion of 'organism'. You suggested viruses were commonly considered organisms; they are not (although there are several arguements that they should be considered organisms). The section isn't philosophical, it is concerned with what "organism" means. I'll try to reduce the coverage of the article, but an article like this (that is, a very broad article) tends to deal with loads of issues. --Oldak Quill 09:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- One problem I have is understanding how the "origin of life" paragraph (discussing prokaryotes and eukaryotes) relates to what an organism is (I'm not a biologist). The word organism isn't mentioned anywhere in the paragraph, and prokaryotes and eukaryotes aren't mentioned elsewhere in the intro. Could someone rewrite it so it ties together? Walkerma 05:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Opening sentence
"living complex adaptive system of organs" - that seems to imply multicellularity (and even more than that). Thinking of organelles as the organs would be an interesting way to look at it for a single-celled organism, but certainly not from the linked article. I'm not sure how to reword it though. TimBentley (talk) 02:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree. According to the definition provided, E. coli is not an organism. AThousandYoung 04:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bold paragraph
What is the worth of the second paragraph, and why does it need to be bold? It seems messy and oddly out of place. I understand that there are missing links in the theory of evolution, but why not have a separate section about this elsewhere in the article (ie not in the introduction), linking to a broader discussion on evolutionary biology? (I certainly hope the addition wasn't religiously inspired, by the way, something like that seriously threatens the integrity of a truth-based encyclopedia.) Jarno Veenema, 16 December 2006
edit: The text was cleaned up as I submitted my criticism. My point about the content and placement is still valid.
[edit] Vandalism
Some idiot has replaced every occurence of "organism" with "orgasm". This is why I hate this place. Theonejanitor
Just refreshed screen (03:09 UTC 14th Jan 2007) and this has been corrected
[edit] "Bioceramics"
I'm moving this picture/caption here. The term "bioceramics" refers to artificial materials employed in medical applications; the use of the term in the context of natural, biological materials does not appear to be common. Perhaps just referring to it as a utilization of ceramics would fix the problem, but I'll leave that to the experts to figure out.--Eloquence* 03:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Maturana, Varela and Autopoiesis
Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela and others have developed interesting studies on Autopoiesis and the nature of living systems. These studies have interesting relations with life and organism. I think some information should be inserted here.Truman Burbank 15:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Introduction
"Two main grades may be distinguished, the prokaryotes and eukaryotes." This is wrong. Most of my books include Archaea as a distinct entity compared to the prokaryotes, simply because they are very different and show more in common to basic eukaryotic single cells than prokaryotic single cells.
